Creationists:: What would convince you that evolution has happened ?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Godismyfather:
Nothing could convince me that evoulution happened. I'm just trying to save some people from suffering ETERNALLY with the most UNIMAGINABLE pain times 1 million in Hell.

​

---

Victoria,If you have decided that evolution is wrong, & nothing would change your mind, why are you here?If you want to enter into discussion, ask questions, make points, address issues, then fine. But what's going to happen is, you are going to be presented with posts that ask you to back up claims, or ask difficult questions. But if you are NOT prepared to address such issues, & are just going to assert "God is right, evolution is wrong", without giving explanations, then you're in the wrong place.I've tried to get Christian 1 to back up his claims at least a half dozen times, to no avail. I'm wrong, he's right, & he doesn't feel the need to explain WHY he's right & I'm wrong. As you can imagine, it all gets a bit frustrating.I'm not saying this is your style, but the "nothing could convince me that evoulution happened", had alarm bells ringing.Take care,Markps Welcome ------------------
Occam's razor is not for shaving with.

​

[This message has been edited by mark24, 02-21-2002]

Victoria,Wow, nice story! I fear that God is going to have to do that to every non-christian, if he did, this board wouldn't exist. The question is, why doesn't he?Not that I doubt you, but the "evolutionist" camp requires evidence in order to believe anything. This is, I hope you understand, perfectly reasonable. And although I applaud you doing something that you believe is going to help others, there are wider issues, such as the HUUUGE body of evidence supporting evolution, a 4.5 bn year old earth (not that I know you're a YEC),etc. that you need to explain. Compared to zero evidence for a supernatural God.Is God deceiving us? Clearly someones got it wrong! Science is extremely rigorous in its method. Out of observation, a hypothesis is formed. That hypothesis has predictions & potential falsifications. If the predictions are born out, & none of the falsifications realised, then you have a scientific theory. The problem creationists have, is to overturn a theory, they have to reinterpret ALL the evidence for a theory & make it fit a creationist theory. Unfortunately none do. They take some things, but cannot take them all. Meaning the scientific theory remains the better one. It is important to note, that ALL scientific theories are tentative, that is to say, none of them claim to be 100% proven. Science PROVES nothing. What it does try to do is make something so obvious, that it is unreasonable to deny it. But proof, no. Would be nice if it could.Take care,Mark------------------
Occam's razor is not for shaving with.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jet:

The study of the ToE must always be approached from a position of acceptance in order for the study to be considered valid.

---

Presumably this means you're saying the ToE relies on circular argument.How so?Mark------------------
Occam's razor is not for shaving with.